Share this with

Northampton say they will “look at every option available” after their England World Cup prospect Dylan Hartley received a 26-week ban for gouging.

Saints have until 5pm on Wednesday to lodge an appeal after 21-year-old Hartley was found guilty of illegally making contact with the eye or eye areas of Wasps forwards James Haskell and Jonny O’Connor during a Guinness Premiership game earlier this month.

Northampton chief executive Allan Robson said: “We are obviously disappointed that Dylan has received this suspension in a crucial week for the club. While we accept the findings of the panel, we will of course look at every option available to us.”

Hartley’s suspension – thought to be the longest handed out to a top-flight English player since Kevin Yates landed a six-month ban for biting in 1998 – will sideline him from rugby until October 17, just three days before the World Cup final in Paris.

Hartley was reported by independent citing officer Alan Mansell, although he was found not guilty of an identical charge in relation to a third Wasps player, England star Joe Worsley.

In addition to missing Saints’ Premiership relegation clash against London Irish on Saturday, he must also sit out England’s two-Test South Africa tour in May and June, three World Cup warm-up games during August and the Webb Ellis Trophy defence during the autumn.

RFU disciplinary officer Jeff Blackett, who chaired Hartley’s hearing, said: “Contact with an opponent’s eyes is a serious offence because of the vulnerability of the area and risk of permanent injury.

“It is often the result of an insidious act and is one of the most abhorred by rugby players. Serious offences such as these – colloquially known as gouging – carry substantial punishment to protect players, deter others and remove culprits from the game to ensure they learn the appropriate lesson.

“The offence against Haskell was at the top end entry point which carries a sanction of between 24 weeks and three years. We believe the appropriate entry point for this was 30 weeks, which we reduced to 26 after taking into account his good character, youth and inexperience.

“We upheld the citing for the offence against O’Connor, but adjudged that no further penalty was necessary.”